Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Intervention Risk Scores: Assessment in an International Multicenter Cohort.

Background Accurate risk stratification is crucial for patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI). The performance of existing surgical and TTVI risk scores (TRI-SCORE, STS-TR [Society of Thoracic Surgeons Tricuspid Regurgitation], and TRIVALVE [International Multisite Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies Registry]) has not been comprehensively evaluated and compared in a contemporary, real-world cohort.Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the discrimination and calibration of these scores in a large international multicenter population of patients undergoing TTVI.Methods This study population included 457 patients from 6 international centers who underwent TTVI (tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement, or transcatheter tricuspid annuloplasty) between 2019 and 2024. The performance of the TRIVALVE score was assessed for the 1-year endpoint of death and rehospitalization. The TRI-SCORE and STS-TR scores were assessed for in-hospital and 30-day mortality, respectively. Performance was evaluated using C statistics for discrimination and smoothed calibration plots for calibration.Results All 3 scores demonstrated limitations. The TRIVALVE score showed low discrimination (area under the curve: 0.609) and was well calibrated after its endpoint was refined to exclude non-cardiovascular-related hospitalizations. The surgically derived TRI-SCORE and STS-TR scores were miscalibrated and significantly overestimated mortality. The TRI-SCORE showed an observed-to-expected mortality ratio of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.07-0.23), and the STS-TR score had an observed-to-expected mortality ratio of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.19-0.60).Conclusions The currently available TTVI risk scores derived from surgical or early TTVI cohorts may not be well suited for accurate risk assessment in contemporary TTVI. The surgical scores when applied to TTVI are miscalibrated, and the TRIVALVE score lacks discrimination. There is a need for the development of a contemporary dedicated TTVI risk model validated specifically for this population.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2026-03-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/96481
Primary Topic
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Intervention Risk Scores: Assessment in an International Multicenter Cohort.

Kai Friedrichs, Jyothy Puthumana, Akhil Narang, Max Potratz et al.
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
article

Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Intervention Risk Scores: Assessment in an International Multicenter Cohort.

Kai Friedrichs, Jyothy Puthumana, Akhil Narang, Max Potratz, Zhiying Meng, Lamis El-Harake, Roman Pfister, Muhammed Gercek, Tanja K Rudolph, Charles J Davidson, Johannes Kirchner, Tobias Geisler, Paul C Cremer, Fabien Praz, Felix Rudolph, Tienush Rassaf, Linda Lee, M Isabel Körber, Mohammad Kassar, Volker Rudolph, Abigail S Baldridge, Laura J Davidson
article en

Abstract

Background Accurate risk stratification is crucial for patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI). The performance of existing surgical and TTVI risk scores (TRI-SCORE, STS-TR [Society of Thoracic Surgeons Tricuspid Regurgitation], and TRIVALVE [International Multisite Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies Registry]) has not been comprehensively evaluated and compared in a contemporary, real-world cohort.Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the discrimination and calibration of these scores in a large international multicenter population of patients undergoing TTVI.Methods This study population included 457 patients from 6 international centers who underwent TTVI (tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement, or transcatheter tricuspid annuloplasty) between 2019 and 2024. The performance of the TRIVALVE score was assessed for the 1-year endpoint of death and rehospitalization. The TRI-SCORE and STS-TR scores were assessed for in-hospital and 30-day mortality, respectively. Performance was evaluated using C statistics for discrimination and smoothed calibration plots for calibration.Results All 3 scores demonstrated limitations. The TRIVALVE score showed low discrimination (area under the curve: 0.609) and was well calibrated after its endpoint was refined to exclude non-cardiovascular-related hospitalizations. The surgically derived TRI-SCORE and STS-TR scores were miscalibrated and significantly overestimated mortality. The TRI-SCORE showed an observed-to-expected mortality ratio of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.07-0.23), and the STS-TR score had an observed-to-expected mortality ratio of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.19-0.60).Conclusions The currently available TTVI risk scores derived from surgical or early TTVI cohorts may not be well suited for accurate risk assessment in contemporary TTVI. The surgical scores when applied to TTVI are miscalibrated, and the TRIVALVE score lacks discrimination. There is a need for the development of a contemporary dedicated TTVI risk model validated specifically for this population.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.